Support NeoGAF

[KSweeley]

WaPo reported that a white man called a black woman kids the n-word in public and when she tried posting on her Facebook about that incident, Facebook censored her by deleting the post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi....beb9bc569001&wpisrc=al_alert-national&wpmk=1

Francie Latour was picking out produce in a suburban Boston grocery store when a white man leaned toward her two young sons and, just loudly enough for the boys to hear, unleashed a profanity-laced racist epithet.

Reeling, Latour, who is black, turned to Facebook to vent, in a post that was explicit about the hateful words hurled at her 8- and 12-year-olds on a Sunday evening in July.

“I couldn’t tolerate just sitting with it and being silent,” Latour said in an interview. “I felt like I was going to jump out of my skin, like my kids’ innocence was stolen in the blink of an eye.”

But within 20 minutes, Facebook deleted her post, sending Latour a cursory message that her content had violated company standards. Only two friends had gotten the chance to voice their disbelief and outrage.

Experiences like Latour’s exemplify the challenges Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg confronts as he tries to rebrand his company as a safe space for community, expanding on its earlier goal of connecting friends and family.

But in making decisions about the limits of free speech, Facebook often fails the racial, religious and sexual minorities Zuckerberg says he wants to protect.

The 13-year-old social network is wrestling with the hardest questions it has ever faced as the de facto arbiter of speech for the third of the world’s population that now logs on each month.

In February, amid mounting concerns over Facebook’s role in the spread of violent live videos and fake news, Zuckerberg said the platform had a responsibility to “mitigate the bad” effects of the service in a more dangerous and divisive political era. In June, he officially changed Facebook’s mission from connecting the world to community-building.

The company says it now ­deletes about 288,000 hate-speech posts a month.

But activists say that Facebook’s censorship standards are so unclear and biased that it is impossible to know what one can or cannot say.

The result: Minority groups say they are disproportionately censored when they use the ­social-media platform to call out racism or start dialogues. In the case of Latour and her family, she was simply repeating what the man who verbally assaulted her children said: “What the f--- is up with those f---ing n----r heads?”

Compounding their pain, Facebook will often go from censoring posts to locking users out of their accounts for 24 hours or more, without explanation — a punishment known among activists as “Facebook jail.”

“In the era of mass incarceration, you come into this digital space — this one space that seems safe — and then you get attacked by the trolls and put in Facebook jail,” said Stacey Patton, a journalism professor at Morgan State University, a historically black university in Baltimore. “It totally contradicts Mr. Zuckerberg’s mission to create a public square.”

“Facebook is regulating more human speech than any government does now or ever has,” said Susan Benesch, director of the Dangerous Speech Project, a nonprofit group that researches the intersection of harmful online content and free speech. “They are like a de facto body of law, yet that law is a secret.”

The company recently admitted, in a blog post, that “too often we get it wrong,” particularly in cases when people are using certain terms to describe hateful experiences that happened to them. The company has promised to hire 3,000 more content moderators before the year’s end, bringing the total to 7,500, and is looking to improve the software it uses to flag hate speech, a spokeswoman said.

“We know this is a problem,” said Facebook spokeswoman ­Ruchika Budhraja, adding that the company has been meeting with community activists for several years. “We’re working on evolving not just our policies but our tools. We are listening.”

Being put in “Facebook jail” has become a regular occurrence for Shannon Hall-Bulzone, a San Diego photographer. In June 2016, Hall-Bulzone was shut out for three days after posting an angry screed when she and her toddler were called lazy “brown people” as they walked to day care and her sister was called a “lazy n----r” as she walked to work. Within hours, Facebook removed the post.

Many activists who write about race say they break Facebook rules and keep multiple accounts in order to play a cat-and-mouse game with the company’s invisible censors, some of whom are third-party contractors working on teams based in the United States or in Germany or the Philippines.

Others have started using alternate spellings for “white people,” such as “wypipo,” “Y.P. Pull,” or “yt folkx” to evade being flagged by the platform activists have nicknamed “Racebook.”

 

[Daedardus]

Title doesn't make sense the first time you read it to be honest.

 

[KernelPanic]

And people think Zuckerberg would make a good POTUS.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

yt folkx is going to be my indie band name

 

[benicillin]

Having seen their leaked internal moderation documents, yeah Facebook moderation is total garbage.

 

[Dynasty]

And people think Zuckerberg would make a good POTUS.

Better than the current one but yh that is a low bar.

 

[KSweeley]

Title doesn't make sense the first time you read it to be honest.

The thread title is the title of the WaPo news article:

 

[Busaiku]

Free speech means only white people are allowed to complain.

 

[Westbahnhof]

The thread title is the title of the WaPo news article:

Yeah, it's worded weirdly clickbaity.
Why not make clear who "she" is?
Just call her "a mother" or something. This really sounds odd.

 

[louiedog]

And people think Zuckerberg would make a good POTUS.

Do they? I've really only seen negative criticism of the idea.

 

[TimeEffect]

Video link please?

Edit: Oh, she just shared a post it seems

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

FB censors working on content outside of their region seems like a pretty stupid oversight.

It's also growing kind of tiresome to see the banhammer coming down swiftly on social activists, but every other day we read stories about hate groups and shit-posters who roam free until they make a public ass of themselves OFF of the platform. Then FB jumps in trying to play the hero.

Having seen their leaked internal moderation documents, yeah Facebook moderation is total garbage.

Context?

 

[Zoe]

Video link please?

Edit: Oh, she just shared a post it seems

There wasn't a video, it was a text post that was automatically flagged because of the language.

 

[Rorschach]

yt folkx is going to be my indie band name

Wypipo is the newest pokemon. An evolution of Mr Mime.

 

[Apharmd]

Title made sense to me, but I know that FB's moderation policies are pretty racist against minorities.

 

[ClosingADoor]

So the system doesn't understand that it is a quote and assumes the user is using racial slurs. Sounds tough to solve in code, they should have more manual actions.

 

[KSweeley]

The Guardian published articles about Facebook's moderation policies and has a section on here called "The Documents": https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/facebook-files

 

[Derwind]

Of course Facebook of all platforms would be the one to stick up for racism. Racebook is an very accurate nickname.

 

[Ivan 3414]

Years ago, there was an increasingly common sentiment that people who weren't on social media were some sort of anti-social leper, but these days I don't blame anyone for going off the social grid. There's far too much vitriol on these platforms for it to be a healthy environment

 

[sphagnum]

Free speech means only white people are allowed to complain.

Would Facebook allow white people to complain about white people?

I should test this...

 

[benicillin]

FB censors working on content outside of their region seems like a pretty stupid oversight.

It's also growing kind of tiresome to see the banhammer coming down swiftly on social activists, but every other day we read stories about hate groups and shit-posters who roam free until they make a public ass of themselves OFF of the platform. Then FB jumps in trying to play the hero.



Context?

https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms

Facebook’s Secret Censorship Rules Protect White Men from Hate Speech But Not Black Children
A trove of internal documents sheds light on the algorithms that Facebook’s censors use to differentiate between hate speech and legitimate political expression.

 

[Charles Brandon]

So sad, those poor kids getting a harsh slap of reality right in the face.

 

[Zoe]

So the system doesn't understand that it is a quote and assumes the user is using racial slurs. Sounds tough to solve in code, they should have more manual actions.

Yeah, there has to be manual verification for cases like this, but what do you do with the post while it's waiting for moderation?

 

[Linkura]

They're ok with alt-right and transphobic assholes though.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms

Jesus FB what a god damned mess.

 

[collige]

So the system doesn't understand that it is a quote and assumes the user is using racial slurs. Sounds tough to solve in code, they should have more manual actions.

I think the issue here is that the manual censors are following dumb rules. If anything, I think solving this in code in the future is going to be far more effective than outsourcing moderation and training a bunch of subjective people.

 

[KSweeley]

Jesus FB what a god damned mess.

Here's even more regarding Facebook's moderation policies: https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/facebook-files

 

[Jonnax]

https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms

That picture is both sad and funny.

Feels like it must be a parody but here we are.

 

[Shadowhelper]

Facebook is a disgrace.

If Zuckerberg is such a liberal why do their algorithms discriminate against minority speech but not white speech at all?

There needs to be a new social media platform that is free from the disease of Alt right.

 

[n00bsauce87]

a.k.a. Why can't we say it in social media but you can? Nope, it ends today

Facebook is a disgrace.

If Zuckerberg is such a liberal why do their algorithms discriminate against minority speech but not white speech at all?

There needs to be a new social media platform that is free from the disease of Alt right.

The term "liberal" is such a loaded word. It can accompany a large swath of people. I for one am not surprised to see this from a "liberal".

 

[ReaperXL7]

And people think Zuckerberg would make a good POTUS.

Not saying he would ( I personally don't think so) but how much does Zuckerberg really participate in the operations of Facebook at this point?

I'd assume he's too busy being rich to bother doing any of the work himself.

 

[Zoe]

That picture is both sad and funny.

Feels like it must be a parody but here we are.

Wasn't it said that's because "white" and "men" are two specific groups subject to scrutiny while "drivers" and "children" are not?

 

[Dierce]

Racists are fucking scum and so are enablers. Fuck you facebook and zuckenshit for ruining the world by spearheading conservative misinformation. They are perfectly fine if a white male posts racist garbage on their profile. They are no different than isis with their bigotry and should be considered the same and banned automatically.

 

[captive]

the crazy thing is the racists aren't likely to even use words like the n word on facebook. They'll just spread their hate by commenting on articles saying things like the cop is always right, the black kid is guilty for some bs reason.

 

[tapedeck]

I don't know shit about how their moderation works but maybe Facebook has an algorithm that kinda automatically censors the word 'nigger'..which in theory is obviously a good thing but in situations like this doesn't allow the victim to share what happened...?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

This is strange to hear for me because meanwhile alt-reich chucklefucks are hosting racist drum circles all over Facebook every day.

 

[KernelPanic]

Not saying he would ( I personally don't think so) but how much does Zuckerberg really participate in the operations of Facebook at this point?

I'd assume he's too busy being rich to bother doing any of the work himself.

Day to day operations no.

But he's the CEO, he sets the mandate. If FB really wanted to curb hate and fake news he'd only need to set the policy and his subordinates do the rest.

He's either OK with how things because that's what he wants or he doesn't really give a shit. Either way it's on him.

Years ago, there was an increasingly common sentiment that people who weren't on social media were some sort of anti-social leper, but these days I don't blame anyone for going off the social grid. There's far too much vitriol on these platforms for it to be a healthy environment

This sort of thing needs to become a movement and put pressure on social media CEOs to curb this shit.

Twitter is barely readable with all the Pepe, MAGA assholes and bots etc.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Facebook is and has been full of shit for ages, at least when it comes to issues like this one. I'm honestly surprised that people are still giving Zuckerberg the benefit of the doubt considering who his business associates are. It seems like most of that young Silicon Valley crowd leans towards the alt-right.

 

[Kinyou]

Wasn't it said that's because "white" and "men" are two specific groups subject to scrutiny while "drivers" and "children" are not?

Yep. Afaik, are subsets of groups not protected. Only if one of the larger categories is attacked it's hate speech. It doesn't make all that much sense to me.
Edit: ah the article also has the slides

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Ahhh. I as curious about where "wypipo" came from. Makes sense now.

 

[jtb]

And people think Zuckerberg would make a good POTUS.

Nobody thinks this, thankfully.

 

[stuminus3]

Yet Facebook tell me people are doing nothing wrong when I complain about people sharing snuff videos and being recommended to like Milo hate videos.

Garbage moderation.

 

[jetjevons]

Facebook schmacebook. What kind of POS garbage excuse for human being says that?!

 

[talkingood]

Correct my ignorance if I'm mistaken, but isn't this just a case of flagging the n-word and removing the post because the assumption is that it's being used in a way that abuses black people online? It seems to me like Facebook wants to prevent their platform from devolving even further into YouTube comments territory, although I've stumbled into some dark corners of Facebook that are already pretty bad.

Obviously they shouldn't have removed this instance, given the circumstances of a mother sharing this awful incident, but how many people does Facebook have to look carefully through all of these posts? It seems like it would take far more than algorithms to comprehend the sort of nuance required here, and the manpower to carefully read and understand every flagged post might be prohibitive. I really don't know.

 

[tapedeck]

Correct my ignorance if I'm mistaken, but isn't this just a case of flagging the n-word and removing the post because the assumption is that it's being used in a way that abuses black people online? It seems to me like Facebook wants to prevent their platform from devolving even further into YouTube comments territory, although I've stumbled into some dark corners of Facebook that are already pretty bad.

Obviously they shouldn't have removed this instance, given the circumstances of a mother sharing this awful incident, but how many people does Facebook have to look carefully through all of these posts? It seems like it would take far more than algorithms to comprehend the sort of nuance required here, and the manpower to carefully read and understand every flagged post might be prohibitive. I really don't know.

This is basically what I was thinking but you articulated it much better.

 

[Fuchsdh]

Free speech means only white people are allowed to complain.

This statement makes no sense, as if Facebook had a free speech policy she wouldn't have had her post taken down. The issue is that Facebook is limiting speech on their platform, and doing so in a way people find inconsistent and arbitrary.

Correct my ignorance if I'm mistaken, but isn't this just a case of flagging the n-word and removing the post because the assumption is that it's being used in a way that abuses black people online? It seems to me like Facebook wants to prevent their platform from devolving even further into YouTube comments territory, although I've stumbled into some dark corners of Facebook that are already pretty bad.

Obviously they shouldn't have removed this instance, given the circumstances of a mother sharing this awful incident, but how many people does Facebook have to look carefully through all of these posts? It seems like it would take far more than algorithms to comprehend the sort of nuance required here, and the manpower to carefully read and understand every flagged post might be prohibitive. I really don't know.

It absolutely would. And Facebook definitely does have live human beings (thousands of them) who have to sift through reported posts and all the vile images and text. It's not a great job.

But these systems aren't perfect, nor great. Either you're relying on algorithms to flag stuff, which ignores context, or you wait for people to report things, which has its own problems (white supremacists could just brigade report a social activist's posts, for instance) and at the end of the day these thousands of reviewers probably only have a few seconds to approve or deny something.

Moral of the story is: Facebook is a platform like any other and expecting them to be good about this stuff when they are dealing with literally nearly two billion people posting each and every month seems unlikely, even if they do improve.

 

[O Canada Our Home and Native Land]

This is what the freeze peach crowd wanted right? There's nothing wrong with censorship. Free speech is dumb. haha

I feel bad for the kids and mom though. Censorship is a tough nut to crack even in responsible hands, which Facebook isn't at all. There is going to be growing pains especially at this scale with automation. I don't think China still has it locked down.

 

[CHC]

Anything to preserve the status quo.

 

[BriGuy]

Who the fuck even does something like that. "A racist" doesn't seem like a sufficient label or accurate description here.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Yeah, there has to be manual verification for cases like this, but what do you do with the post while it's waiting for moderation?

Maybe they can limit its spread to only direct friends until verification. That way, those people are reached but you prevent racist things from spreading further for now.